welcome everybody here to the heritage foundation. i'm delighted to introduce dr. sebastian gauker is with the nonresident scholar. he recently served as deputy assistant and as vice president for national security support

under regular warfare. please welcome him mow. >> i would like to thank john who is key to this speech happening today. most importantly of all for giving me my official heritage tie. sorry. is it simon? >> raspberry. i will talk for about 25, 30

minutes. we'll have a q and a. i'll try to set the stage for what has changed. let's go back two years. let's go back to the obama administration and look at the reality of the terrorist threat dploebl globally and to the united states. two years ago isis, the islamic state of iraq had grown out of being a small sob group to being the first jihadi movement it is

an islamic state in the middle east. according to the financial times this group was able to raise at least $2 million per day as its budget from racketeering, local taxation. it controlled territory in multiple country of the middle east. this is unclassified according to the nctc isis alone had operational affiliates.

it held ground in the middle east. wu wasn't running. wasn't hiding. in the middle east it had 6 million human beings. that's just two years ago. we have been told by the last administration that isis is a generational threat. remember this? our children, our grandchildren would be fighting decades from now. less than one year into the trump administration. one of the most important things, steve was the chief strategist to the president. it was to target one specific

aspect of the islamic state. we called it the physical califate. we want to make sure within weeks or months of coming into office, with the unleashing of our military the physical califate would be no more. we have liberated and taken back the operational. how is this possible? how have we gone from this massive cali ffate reorganizati to being in its death throws?

very simply because of two things, a direct determination of what the threat is and after the correct determination the application of a strategic

response. when you allow ors to fill the vacuum you have things like isis become as powerful as they did. so number one there was a flawed understanding. there was a problematic understanding it is specifically

social movement theory. social movement theory would have you believe that all violence of an organized nature is the result of physical and economic issues. it's a bad snl skit, right? or is it montipython. have you ever lost your job? i'm sure immediately the next

day you wanted to go out and behead somebody, yes? this dewas deemed to be. half of my officers were muslim. people who are fighting jihadis back home. one of the places we went was to the obama state department, to the edge of counter messaging. we had government officials who are supposed to be undermining the jihadi.

i had them ask what do you think the role is in this war? great question. what was the answer? in unison, idealology has no role to play in this war. stunning. i asked them to repeat the answer so everybody in the room could believe what they were hearing. idealology has no role to play. it is all about route causes and upstream factors. it is a very interpretation of a threat. why? it cannot be spiritual. it must be physical. it tells you a lot about how the last administration saw the world.

if you misdiagnose a patient what will you give them? the wrong treatment. if they have third stage cancer and you say you have the flu go home and hydrate and take some aspirin. what will happen? he'll die. that's the problem, misdiagnosis. it was the highest honor of my life to come and work for him as deputy assistant. i realized i could work for him because he is of course what? she kryptonite.

he looked at the threat we faced clearly as a war, not as some problem to be managed, but as a war. not only that he wants to win that war. that's exactly what we have been doing as a nation. the physical califate no longer exists. our troops have been unleashed. he came up to me in maybe week five and say you have no idea how the moral has skyrocketed because we are no longer -- but we are allowed to do our job and it is clear the president trusts us. much easier to wip a war when that's your attitude to your forces. we have gone under secretary

mattis from a strategy of attrition to a strategy of annihilation. think about recent unclassified reports. put it into perspective. in the last 16 years when did beever have jihadi surrender them? you get a short salvation. of surrenderi rendsurrendering to held for that one. what else do we have to appreciate? we have to appreciate what the

president has done in terms of leadership not only amongest his own allies but amongest muslim partners. if you want to understand where this nation is going you don't have to wait until monday for the release of the national security strategy which i can tell you because i was in most of the meetings will be a very sou sound document. it will be a very difficult document. it won't be the shopping list we have had since the bush years that throws everything in and has no prioritization. it will be a very rational document and will have the president's voice in it. it won't be in a designed by committee atrocity. until we get there i can

strongly recommend to go back and read the president's speech and the president's speech. absolutely essential. i know who wrote those speeches. great members of the white house team. why are they important? they fulfill the first of war. almost every single time they would get it wrong.

>> he is absolutely right. whether you're fighting al qaeda or whether you're fighting isis we with respect alleren't allow. don't take my word for it. google it. the chairman of the joint chiefs there should not be mention of islam and the word jihad is prescribed.

you are not allowed to discuss jihad when you're trying to train people to be jihadists. don't mention the word nazi. again, absolutely asinine and absurd. that has gone. the political correctness has gone. why? what did he do? he could have given a speech, usual diplomacy. no. he went to the heart of the muslim world, where islam was founded. what did he say? he didn't say hey, we like you. he said gentlemen, sort out your societies. he said rid your places of worship. rid your societies of the

terrorists. as an arab woman told me two weeks later, that is the speech we have been waiting for for 16 years, not eight years, 16 years. no brushing the issues under the carpet, to start by cleaning out their own front doors, their own backyards. what happened? they got serious. last month mbs and saudi arabia, got serious. leadership matters. on top of that you to know who you are and why you're fighting. it is probably to most important. it will go down as a historic speech. why? because of what it says about us and the return of america.

it is not an accident that we chose the location of that speech to be where it was. in that speech what did he say? he said we are a christian

nation. you can kill a jihadi and 20 guys will volunteer to replace him. you win when people no longer want to become jihadists. that's victory, not measuring body bags. not much of a better metric today. just like during the doecold wae must defeat the idealology. the great ronald reagan delegitimized and we must do the

same with global jihadism. i look forward to talking about the need to focus our efforts with our muslim allies. that will be the ultimate victory. churchh churchhill was right when he said you do not go to war unless you define your victorys. what are victory conditions today? as far as i'm concerned it's very easy. in my book i call the threat we face today a new form of hybrid totalitarianism. it has a connective tissue to the fascism of 30s and 40s and

come kmcommunism to the cold world. if you disagree with jihadi there is one option left with you, surrender. the only other option is to destroy them. what we face today is a new totalitarian threat, a religiously informed one. it is not islam. anybody that says islam should travel to pakistan to see that there is no monolific islam. we have to make sure our muslim friends can defeat the 7th

century version of islam. we will have won when the black flag of jihad is as june -- we will have won. then they will norecruit. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you very much for those tremendous very very strong robust remarks. i would like to follow up your speech with a series of questions on a wide range of foreign and national security policy issues. you have already referenced the

national security strategy. in your view what will be the fundamental difference between the new strategy and the obama administration national security strategy? >> so first things first, the style of the document will be very different. it was in part a product of an interagency process.

it should be understood. the president is neither an interventionist for on isolationist. he is nieeither an isolationist who thinks well, ignore everybody else, he'll be fine. the president thinks it is un-american to invade other peoples countries and occupy them. 1776 is about anti imperialism. this nation was born in our response against imperialism. it will be a very wise middle path. as security strategies could do and vice presidehaven't done it

prioriti prioritize. the art of strategy begins with saying some things are more important than other things. not everything is equal. some nations are more important to america than other nations. it's not politically correct. it's just a fact of life. some people are more important to you than other people. you can expect three things to be prioritized, russia, china and the ideal logical nature we face from terrorism. >> thank you very much. i want to follow up with a question on iran which i expect will feature heavily in the new strategy.

congress has been very slow to act in terms of reimposing u.s. sanctions and then goes back to the white house for further movement on this. in your view can this iran nuclear deal be salvaged? is it in america's interest to keep this deal in place? it is far better off simply walking away from the greemagre? he knows it. he knows this is a bad deal. my advice to the president was not simply to declrertify. have you heard of a deal with you give everything to the other party before you comply? dealing with your kids, you can

have the candy before dippenner. it duoesn't work. the deal in its essence is flawed. we participate in a deal with a country that was deemed by the state department to be the largest state sponsored terrorism at a time when the secretary of state actually said yep, some of this money will go to terrorist attacks. two years ago a metro police officer in d.c. who had jihadi sympathies believed he was sending a $500 money gram to isis. he was in fact dealing with an fbi informant. that individual who believed he was helping jihadis was

convicted to the extent of $500. the last released more than $150 billion to iran. material support to terrorism wasn't an issue. the biggest problem of all, the deal did you waoesn't stop nucl wi -- acquisition, it is if they stick to it. as we learned during the cold war your former employer knew all too well. there is a funny thing, they usually don't abide by the agreements you sign with them. that's something the president

understands. what do you think is the significance of this? what the the message the president is sending through this decision? what do you see as the long-term impact? >> i think there are three respons responses. it is a kind of spiritual or natural law response. the domestic is one that -- we have a politician that actually keeps his promises.

it is shock horror. a man who makes promises on the campaign trail and actually delivers on those promises. it's a great new yardstick. secondly, i think there's an aspect to his decision that is about truth. it's the right thing to do. i know this, right? this is how he operates. i can tell you i'm not going to give any names. there are only three members who supported the president on that decision. three people. everybody else, even some people you think have a very tough reputation said no. this is disasterous. you can want do that. the president bucked them all and he said no.

this is the right thing to do. we promised and as for your last question my hope is that it injects a sense of reality into that situation because we need it desperately. the idea it will create violen e violence. has it been a wonderful state of affairs? no. this is a reality check. it will be ultimately the test of good faith. are we going to negotiate in good faith or not? now the test is yours. are you prepared to negotiate in good faith? we shall see.

swiftching to the issue -- >> i put on my cufflin links fo you. >> i spent a lot of time in britain. what's your view? the long-term impact on the special relationship, what do you think of the prospects of the free trade agreement? we have seen discussions started on that front. you have the big picture regard to the impact of the united states. >> it is an important event in history. however it develops, which ever full-ti final version is implemented it will not negatively effect our

relationship. we have these massive photographs ofts president and vice president traveling the world. usually they tell you that every two weeks. it stayed there for at least two months. what was it? it was the photograph of the president sitting down in the oval office. the relationship will always be strong. it's not up to us. we'll tell you, you'll be at the back if you don't go the right way. we don't do that. this is not thousand president thinks. the relationship will be sound. nevertheless brexit will be understood for what it represents more broadly speaking. brexit is kissing cousins to the trump phenomenon.

i reject this label that these are pop list moverments. brexit at heart is about two things, common sense and representative and accountable government being demanded. that's what it's about. i'm now a proud american. one of the key characteristics of the fellow americans that i adore is common sense. one of the reasons this pragmatic realtor won last year despite never having held public office before is because she a man of common sense. the american people had had enough such as identity politics being rammed down their throat. they want to have accountable

government. i think brexit is a very positive thing and it will be the first of many many similar events. >> what do you think is the future of the european union? it has been tremendous resistance and we are now seeing some extremely tense very very heated negotiations between the british government and the european commissioner at this time. do you think that we are going to see fupd -- fundamental changes? with your experience in the white house, did you sense any real change in thinking on the

part of the u.s. administration with regard to the future of the project? they have basically backed the european project. it did you want really have one. it will collapse. it will collapse or it will further evolve into what it is today which is a club in which different membership categories exist and which really isn't a club but a group of micro clubs.

why? because it lost sight of why it was created. i thought undergrads -- we have to go back to the basics. why was it? why collin steel? collin steel, why? becau because coal and steel you needed. the project originally was making sure france and germany would not go to war with each other again. this has become this -- i think it's the first time i have been

able to use the phrase. it is deeper i want grantegratie face of deeper integration. it is absurd. the idea that you pour sovereignty and actually sup superce supercedes your own instituti . constitution. it is a focus on national security or they will continue to break up into various different clubettes. i can't guarantee you what it will be. as long as donald trump is

president it will remain healthily skeptical. >> that's very encouraging to hear. >> we did not rehearse any of this, honest. >> you mentioned it was a real game changer. one of the most important presidential speeches. he also really directly spoke to the islamist threats on european soil and this is a huge issue across the atlantic at a time when there's intense debating. it is about 2 million migrants

from a range of countries. what do you see actually as the long-term impact of the open-door decision? we have seen a fundamental rejection of that. and do you think that the refugee crisis in europe will have a major impact? >> i think when it comes to it it already has. the president wants to make sure we don't see here what is happening in europe. what has the president said? there will be no more diversity lottery. there will be no more chain migration. we will not fall victim to what we are seeing in europe.

compare it to the new year's eve speech. these two sentences were next to each other. they respearen't taken from dift parts of her speech. it is threat number one. in the next sentence she said despite that being the case we will maintain our open door policy to refugees. that is the textbook when you go to a psychiatry book. that is the definition. we will not allow that to happen here. the idea that i just came from a week in australia and new so zeala zealand, is anybody familiar with that? probably the toughest

immigration policies in the world. if you cannot demonstrate while you should live in australia and why there is nobody that can want do the job that you want to do you will not become an australian. the president takes this question very seriously. this is the most important issue. he wants all americans to prosper but much more important he wants all of us to be safe. he takes his role very seriously. the supreme court recognized there is one american that decides who come to this country and under what conditions they will be. it is the president of the united states. yes. the facts are out there. we know that the attackers, at least one of them was on a syrian passport.

he had refugee. we wrote a report at my company. it's called isis, the threat to the united states. we just looked at isis recruitment in america in the last two years. we have seep a six fold increase in comparison to al qaeda. we have seen in two years more than 130 people linked to isis. the president will stop that and is already stopping that. it's going to be much much safer. >> i think it's significant in the last 12 months or so we have seen a real strengthening in eastern europe we now have an

active discussion sending weapons to ukraine. we have seen the united states challenging the russians and syria. it is something the obama administration did not actually do. what do you see as the next steps of the administration should take with regard to the russian menace in europe. is nato up to the task, up to the challenge. we have seen some after tremendous pressure from the united states. >> these are the same russians we were supposed to be colluding with, right? >> yes. >> isn't it so interesting? practically every one of them has been bad. these are the people we are supposed to be colluding with.

in recent months we have seen special military 150side and ots for a man that needed nato. we managed to get nato to commit to something we have been trying for 30 years to get nato to do which was to spend the amount they agreed they could spend on defense. this is the art of the deal. if you want to understand the president read his book. it tells you how he operate and it is very successful. let me be clear how he thinks about russia. i think it was the last press conference he gave in trump tower. it was the press conference when he happened over his empire to his children. as he was leaving the press conference one of the reporters shouted what about moscow? what about putin? the president stopped.

he said in theory i'd like to have better relations with russia. why is that continraversial? it has a veto vote. my father was arrested by communists and tortured and given a life sentence. there's no love loss but it's an important nation. the president says id like to have better relations with them however he added right now it did you want really look very likely. then he closed by saying, if that is the case, so be it.

thus spoke the pragmatist. that's the president. he is a melding of patriotism and pragmatism. we'll continue to deal with that nation as a problem nation, not as a strategic threat. 600 more are dying per year than a being born. this is a situation with severe internal problems. it's not a strategic player in thece sense of other countries. it is an utter spoiler. it has exploited the lack of leadership shown by president obama and the regime of putin. it must be understood.

most nations in the world are stat t status quo actives. some that we posit good faith in everybody. some countries there is no good faith even when they smile at you and say i want to be your friend, they don't mean it. >> russia is one of them. they are an anti-status quo actor and the president fully understands that. and he will deal with it in practical terms but i'd add one thing -- he said this on the campaign trail and the white house "i am not looking for new enemies. i'm not going to kick a hornet's nest because it's cool to kick a hornet's nest." doesn't mean we like the regime, but we're also pragmatists. >> let's have a last question. big picture question on american leadership at a critically

important time on the world stage. in your mind, what is the fundamental difference between the trump world view and that of barack obama in terms of foreign policy? what are the two or three defining principles of u.s. foreign policy right now and are we looking at a new era of far more force fful and robust u.s. leadership? >> the biggest difference between a trump foreign policy and an obama foreign policy is very simple, it's very easy. president donald trump thinks america is a good country. that's the biggest difference. that doesn't mean we necessarily have a role to play in every part of the world, but we are special. we are a special country. and our leadership matters. very simply put, a world with

american leader shship, not intervention, a world with american leadership is a much safer world for all good people whatever their skin color, whatever their religion, it is a much better world for everyone. great question. thank you. >> well, on that note, i'd like to draw our event to a close. a big thank you to dr. sebastian gorka for his tremendous remarks today here at heritage, we're very grateful to you for joining us and very grateful to everybody for joining us as well for today's event. so thank you very much. [ applause ] [ indistinct audio ]

[ indistinct audio ] [ indistinct audio ]

>> sunday on c-span's q&a, author around "wall street journal" contributor aj b aime with his book "the accidental president." >> roosevelt's funeral was saturday and sunday. truman was terrified to give the speech. he talks about it. the night before he laid in his bed and prayed to god he would not mess it up. he climbs the stairs, four stairs to the pulpit and he sees his wife in the crowd and she's crying. she's crying because roosevelt is dead, the nation is in shock, and she never wanted to be the first lady, she never wanted her husband to be president and she's frightened. she's frightened for him. meanwhile, he has to get up there and inspire confidence in his administration and the whole world. the whole world has to be -- has to understand that america will continue, that the war will

continue. >> q&a sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span. the deadline for c-span student cam 2018 video documentary competition is right around the corner. it's january 18. we're asking students to choose a provision of the u.s. constitution and create a video illustrating why it's important to you. students across the country are in the final stretch and sharing their experience with us through twitter. these students participated in a student cam film festival. this group wrapped up an interview on climate change. and this student's learning a lot and having fun while editing. our competition is open to all middle school and high school students grades six through 12. $100,000 will be awarded in cash prizes and the grand prize of $5,000 will go to the student or team with the best overall entry. for more information, go to our web site, studentcam.org.

>> and we're live this morning on capitol hill. this is a look inside a hearing room in the dirksen senate office building where today the senate finance committee is holding a confirmation hearing for alex azar who president trump has nominated for secretary of health and human services. he would replace former hhs secretary tom price who president trump fired because he took expensive private jet flights and billed the taxpayers for that. the nominee to fill the job is a former lobbyist and vice president for the pharmaceutical company eli lilly. mr. azar is also an attorney who was general counsel in hhs during the george w. bush administration. according to the news organization axios, democrats are likely to fix their questions on the affordable care act and whether mr. azar if confirmed would try to weaken enrollment in obamacare health insurance plans. democrats also expected to ask about president trump's past promises to lower prescription

drug prices and mr. azar's role in increasing drug prices when he worked at eli lilly. this hearing is expected to get under by that a couple moments. utah senator orrin hatch is chair of the finance committee. the committee's top democrat is senator ron widen of oregon.

[ indistinct audio ] [ indistinct audio ]

[ indistinct audio ] [ indistinct audio ]

[ indistinct audio ] >> you can come up here. >> that's all right. [ indistinct audio ] [ indistinct audio ]

[ indistinct audio ] [ indistinct audio ] [ indistinct audio ]

[ indistinct audio ]

[ indistinct audio ] [ indistinct audio ] the committee will come to order. welcome, everybody, to this morning's hearing. today the committee will consider and exa